Scientific Programme
Sports and Exercise Medicine and Health
IS-MH05 - Effort and its perception: current knowledge and perspectives
Date: 03.07.2025, Time: 15:15 - 16:30, Session Room: Anfiteatro
Description
Effort and its perception regulate our behaviour and are key determinants of motor and cognitive performances. This symposium will review the current knowledge on effort and its perception. To this end, we will use a multidisciplinary approach at the intersection of exercise science, physiology, neuroscience and psychology. This symposium is grounded in theoretical frameworks applicable across various disciplines, considering effort and perception of effort (PE) to have a narrow and specific meaning, and PE as a unique perception dissociated from other exercise-related perceptions, such as pain and fatigue. Dr Halperin will review the definitions of effort and the PE, and discuss key methodological aspects for measuring the PE. Dre André will challenge the general assumption that effort is inherently aversive and discuss a cost-benefit approach to effort-related decision-making. Dr Pageaux will review the current knowledge on the neurophysiology of PE, from its sensory signal(s) to the brain processing of the signal(s) generating the conscious experience of effort. Taken together, these presentations will highlight the crucial need for adopting a multidisciplinary approach to investigate effort and its perception. This symposium will benefit researchers from a range of exercise-related fields, including those focused on increasing engagement and adherence to physical activity, as well as applied sport scientists interested in the regulation of physical performance.
Chair(s)
Benjamin Pageaux
Université de Montréal, École de kinésiologie et des sciences l'activité physique (EKSAP)
Canada
Speaker A
Israel Halperin
Tel Aviv University, Public health
Israel
Read CVECSS Rimini 2025: IS-MH05
An Effortful Task: Defining and Measuring Perception of Effort Defining and Measuring Perception of Effort
Rating of perceived effort (RPE) scales are widely used in exercise science as simple and practical tools for monitoring and prescribing exercise intensity. However, there are certain methodological challenges when using these scales due to the multiple definitions of perceived effort, and insufficient standardization in current measurement practices. In this presentation, I will address these challenges by discussing common definitions of perceived effort, highlighting their circular nature and the insufficient differentiation between perceived effort and other perceptual experiences. I will also address the varied and often conflicting instructions associated with using RPE scales, specifically focusing on two key issues: First, the lack of uniformity in instructions regarding the time domain for RPE reporting. That is, are subjects expected to rate their effort instantaneously or as a summary of the experience during the task? Second, I will cover the significant variability induced by inconsistent application of the scale’s upper anchor (i.e., what 10 on a 0-10 scale signifies). I propose distinguishing between imposed and self-selected anchors, noting that inconsistent use of these could influence the ratings. To overcome these limitations, I propose two strategies: first, adopting a clear, consistent, and narrowly focused definition of perceived effort to avoid the pitfalls of existing definitions and to facilitate collaborative research across disciplines and the transferability of results beyond sports science; second, defining and standardizing the reporting of the time domain and the meaning of upper anchors when collecting and reporting RPE data. Implementing these strategies will enhance the validity of RPE measurements in exercise science and broaden their applicability in other fields.
Speaker B
Nathalie André
Université de Poitiers, Faculté des Sciences du Sport
France
Read CVECSS Rimini 2025: IS-MH05
Effort cost and effort aversion: Two different perceptions of effort
Effort is an important part of daily life for nearly everyone. Managing effort is often a key to health and well-being, as well as to reaching goals, achieving successes, and sustaining good interpersonal relationships. In sport settings, effort is an important component of perseverance in sports training and competitive performance. Understanding the nature of effort is therefore crucial. A large part of the literature on effort claims that effort is perceived as aversive, and this would lead people to systematically avoid exerting effort or to choose the less effortful means of reaching the same goal. Yet, this principle of least effort (Hull, 1943) or principle of minimization of effort does not entail aversion: cost is enough. A parallel “principle of least money” would be that people often prefer the lower price for exactly the same item—and money is clearly a cost, not an aversion. Same with effort. Effort aversion occurs only when costs outweigh benefits. People may choose to exert effort when doing so avoids other kinds of costs such as pain or obtain meaningful reward. If effort is perceived as a cost (rather than an aversion), it follows, however, that people do not avoid effort itself just as they do not always avoid spending money. Rather, they try to avoid the waste of effort, akin to overpaying. Positing that people avoid the waste of effort rather than effort itself can improve the understanding of how, when, and why people exert effort, indeed including even very high effort as in elite athletes. Understanding the factors influencing effort commitment can help athletes engage more efficiently. Focusing on avoidance of wasting effort removes the seeming paradox that people sometimes willingly exert high, even extreme effort. Hull, C. (1943). Principles of behavior. Appleton-Century.
Speaker C
Benjamin Pageaux
Université de Montréal, École de kinésiologie et des sciences lactivité physique (EKSAP)
Canada
Read CVECSS Rimini 2025: IS-MH05
The neurophysiology of perception of effort and its link with performance
Effort is a common experience in our voluntary behaviour, whether we are walking or running, drinking a cup of tea, imagining a movement, or engaging in cognitively demanding tasks like solving a complex puzzle. The experience of effort can be described as "the sensation of expending energy" (1), and "is accompanied by a sensation of labour, a sensation that intensifies as we increase our investment in the task" (1). The perception of effort provides information about the intensity and difficulty of the task being performed. The perception of effort is involved in the regulation of behaviour and influences how the nervous system selects a precise movement from a multitude of possibilities. Thus, the perception of effort is intrinsically linked to performance. In this presentation, I will provide an overview of the current knowledge on the neurophysiology of perceived effort and how this perception is a key determinant of physical performance. The integration of knowledge from different disciplines highlights the importance of studying effort as a perception dissociated from other perceptions we experience during physical exercise, such as pain or fatigue (2). The literature highlights the role of motor command in the perception of effort (2), particularly its corollary discharge. This corollary discharge, also named efference copy, can be defined as a copy of the central commands sent to the working muscles. The origin of the motor command also directs us to the anterior cingulate cortex (3), a key brain area at the interface of cognition, emotions, motor control, and decision-making (4). To illustrate the key role of effort and its perception in the regulation of physical performance, I will use the motivational intensity theory (5), a theoretical framework from the psychology literature used for ~ 15 years in sport science. The motivational intensity theory predicts that we maintain optimal performance in cognitive and motor tasks by increasing effort when task difficulty increases, and that performance decreases when we are no longer able or willing to invest additional effort – when task difficulty increases beyond our perceived capacity or when the value of outcomes/goals diminishes. As the physiological and psychological determinants of performance are task-specific, I will conclude by discussing how the motivational intensity theory could contribute to a better understanding of the regulation of maximal force-power-speed performance (e.g., sprint), endurance performance (e.g., time to exhaustion) and psychomotor performance (e.g., motor skills execution). REFERENCES 1. Preston & Wegner (2009). Oxford handbook of human action, 569-586. 2. Bergevin et al. (2023). Sports Medicine, 53(2), 415-435. 3. Gillies et al. (2019). Autonomic Neuroscience, 216, 51-58. 4. Caruana et al. (2018). Brain, 141(10), 3035-3051. 5. Richter et al. (2016). Advances in motivation science, 3, 149-186.